This is a read-only part of the forum. All threads where seeing happens are stored here and come from this forum, the Facebook guiding area and various LU blogs. The complete list, sorted by guide, contains all links. The archives include threads of those that came to LU already seeing as well.

The experience experiences. The experience is the act of experiencing. And "what experiences" is a figure of speech, a game of words. "Let's pretend for a moment that the experience is not a thing in its own, but there is something separate that 'experiences' it."

What thinks?

What tables? What chairs? What rooms? There is no need to worry about the creator. There is only thinking itself. Whatever conditions coincide, a thought manifests. It does not belong to anything. It is a first-class citizen on its own.

What does?

The sense of doing. Everything is just happening, but "doing" gets slapped on it sometimes, and then "mine" gets slapped on top of that.

What is aware?

Beats me. Life was much better before I started to ask this question. I can't even separate the experience from the awareness of it, let alone "something that is aware" of it. There is nothing but awareness, so why we even invented that word?

However, even though nothing in the direct experience supports it, supposedly there are other direct experiences (like "yours") with content different from "mine". This theory that still feels bothersome - if there is more than one direct experience, how can it be the only source of truth? Probably like the former attachment to the question about abstract concepts.

Yes, there are tons of answers, all are just speculations, attempts to connect the dots. You don't see what you don't see.

1) Is there a separate entity 'self', 'me' 'I', at all, anywhere, in any way, shape or form? Was there ever?

In direct experience there is no "I", "separate", "entity", "was". All are just mind constructs, pretend-there-is stuff.

2) Explain in detail what the illusion of separate self is, when it starts and how it works from your own experience. Describe it fully as you see it now.

It is a method of thinking about the direct experience, much like a mathematical theory. A concept of "me" is introduced "by others" and everything is interpreted in terms of that "me" interacting with "others". Eventually it is forgotten that it is only a make-believe, and there is an urge to "embody" this thought, make "I" "material" as if it was a part of direct experience. A feeling in the body is chosen and assigned to play role of "me". Then it is just a process where something happens, a "me/mine" function is applied to decide whether to label it this way or not, and if yes, the familiar proxy bodily feeling is activated. The loop is closed - a me-thought, reinforced by the me-feeling.

Sorry, been programming for many years, so that's just another model to describe this stuff. In practice, it is just a thought following an experience and leading to other thoughts and feelings.

3) How does it feel to see this? What is the difference from before you started this dialogue? Please report from the past few days.

It feels "less". As something has fallen off out of no longer being necessary. As a problem that still stands where I left it, but no longer "mine" to solve. As the end of craving for a miracle of some sort - for something to exist even though deep inside you always knew it was not there.

4) What was the last bit that pushed you over, made you look?

It was more of a realization that the only thing that matters now is looking at the direct experience. To me it always was "yes, that and also..." It was the realization that nobody is going to be impressed with that "and also" part. Essentially, your unyielding resolve not to accept anything that does not come from the direct experience. Thank you for that! Afterwards, something just gave up and stopped arguing with and overriding what the eyes see.

5) Describe decision, intention, free will, choice and control. What makes things happen? How does it work? What are you responsible for? Give examples from experience.

Decision, intention, choices simply emerge like any other thought. Natural processes. Free will and control are false beliefs that come together with the illusion of the self.

Experientally, things just happen. Nothing "makes" them. Not more than one episode of a movie "makes" another episode.

What I am responsible for? "I" am a thought. A thought cannot be responsible for anything. "Responsibility" is another thought. It happens in the right circumstances. Right now I am with kids. A thought happens that they need to be watched after and another one that "I am responsible for it." Now new thoughts and actions are not the same as before, if we bother to compare with memory.

6) Anything to add?

Nothing but thoughts :)
The experience is still sometimes spiced with emotions, impossible choices, false premises and thoughts "if this ever is going to stop". It still hasn't completely hit me quite yet. It can't be any different right now. It is what it is. Direct experience at its finest.

Kevin, no rush on my side, this has been tremendously helpful so far. I want to make sure the shift has a lasting effect. Thank you so much for all your patience!

Does a separate entity exist "outside direct experience?"

This is just talk. There is no separate entity in or outside of direct experience. The whole notion of "separate entity" is the creation of mind. And it's not just because "everything is connected" as some like to say. There is literally no separate entities. Nothing to be connected with anything, no connecting either. Just this, Rigpa, Atman, the eternal Now, however you like to call it, all words come afterwards. I feel like I need to wash my mouth after saying them. I have no way of describing it, it's simply impossible in principle. If it was describable, it wouldn't be "it". Ha!

What hasn't hit you yet, and what makes you think something is going to hit you?
And seeing as we've gone down this road, who is there for something to hit?

There is no "I" to be hit with it, it was just a figure of speech. But there are experiences. And they can be looked at afterwards and analyzed. I know, it's not DE, but stay with me for a moment. I get angry at kids. Emotion arises. Experiencing it, I can sense that its message is "why can't they just listen to me". And immediate knowing - no "them", no control, false expectation. Still, experientially the anger hits first and the understanding comes next. If the belief in "I" and control was completely gone, the anger wouldn't even arise (at least the one that can be traced back to this belief). The control-habit, the "karma" if you will, is still wired in my brain. It does not manifest anymore in a calm environment but shows in rough situations. Which is OK, it's just a direct experience. But in the heat of the moment, there is a feeling of resistance to what is, and it hurts.

As you've identified most things as thoughts, what is left experiencing those thoughts.

Why there must be "someone" experiencing thoughts? Seeing happens, thinking happens. No seer, no thinker. There is no "-er", period. It was invented. Only "-ing". But really, every single word is a lie by its very nature. Betray the direct experience by talking about it, and you are immediately in a web of lies. So I better just shut up and drink some tea. Gulp!

I am happy to report the guides agreed with my felt determination that you have seen clearly through the illusion of a separate self.
I will contact you by PM about further access to LU forums you will likely find useful.
Congratulations!

Kevin

"Don't ask the mind to confirm what is beyond the mind. Direct experience is the only valid confirmation."~Nisargadatta Maharaj